Wed, Feb 10, 2016·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Vancouver Canucks 2, Arizona Coyotes 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Arizona Coyotes win this game 57% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAN | 16 | 113 | 07 | 226 |
| ARI | 012 | 110 | 012 | 134 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:27VANJake VirtanenAssists: Jared McCann, Dan Hamhuis · Wrist, 0.04 xG1–0
- P2 2:38ARIMartin HanzalPPAssists: Max Domi, Anthony Duclair · Wrist, 0.11 xG1–1
- P2 15:13VANJannik HansenGWGAssists: Chris Tanev, Henrik Sedin · Wrist, 0.13 xG2–1
Penalties (8)
- P1 7:16ARIAntoine Vermette: High sticking2 min
- P1 15:30ARINicklas Grossmann: Interference2 min
- P1 18:31VANAdam Cracknell: Roughing2 min
- P2 2:06VANAlex Biega: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P2 10:36ARIAntoine Vermette: Cross checking2 min
- P2 16:42ARIMax Domi: High sticking2 min
- P2 18:24VANRadim Vrbata: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P3 11:58VANMatt Bartkowski: Interference2 min
Replay
Watch the game unfold on the ice: every shot, hit, turnover and faceoff appears as it happened, then fades. Drag the timeline to jump; goals are marked on it.
20:00
P1
- P1 20:00Richardson won the faceoff against Sedin
- Goal
- Shot
- Miss
- Block
- Hit
- Takeaway
- Giveaway
- Faceoff
- Penalty
The numbers
Team totals, side by side.
Line combinations that worked
Model-basedEach team's forward lines and defence pairs at 5-on-5 (two minutes or more together), best first by expected goals for minus against.
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestVrbata – Baertschi – Horvat8:42
xG 0.53–0.18 (75%)attempts 12–5goals 0–0
- Sedin – Sedin – Hansen11:39
xG 0.51–0.27 (66%)attempts 19–9goals 1–0
- Burrows – Vey – Etem9:45
xG 0.32–0.22 (59%)attempts 7–14goals 0–0
- Cracknell – Virtanen – McCann6:57
xG 0.14–0.15 (48%)attempts 7–7goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestTanev – Hutton12:50
xG 0.58–0.12 (83%)attempts 24–12goals 1–0
- Hamhuis – Sbisa9:53
xG 0.56–0.22 (72%)attempts 9–8goals 0–0
- Sbisa – Hutton2:55
xG 0.00–0.03 (0%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestVermette – Boedker – Rieder9:37
xG 0.22–0.15 (59%)attempts 7–8goals 0–0
- Chipchura – Boedker – Gaudet2:06
xG 0.02–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
- Doan – Richardson – Martinook10:44
xG 0.34–0.32 (52%)attempts 12–16goals 0–0
- Hanzal – Duclair – Domi10:32
xG 0.39–0.57 (41%)attempts 11–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestGrossmann – Stone8:21
xG 0.43–0.36 (55%)attempts 10–9goals 0–0
- Stone – Connauton4:53
xG 0.19–0.20 (48%)attempts 10–5goals 0–0
- Michalek – Dahlbeck5:36
xG 0.02–0.08 (16%)attempts 5–5goals 0–0
How the game flowed
Model-basedChance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.
Running total of expected goals for each team. Steep climbs are spells of pressure; dots are goals. Shaded bands mark power plays (team colour), 4-on-4 or 3-on-3 (grey) and empty nets.
Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute
Win probability
Model-basedHow each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI is favoured, below it VAN. Dots are goals.
Did the better team win?
Every shot replayed 10,000 times, scoring with its expected-goal probability.
Based on shot quality alone, Arizona Coyotes win this game 57% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − VAN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).